List of NGOs in Russia targeted under "Foreign Agents" Law

Updated List of Nongovernmental Organizations Targeted under
the “Foreign Agents” Law

DEcember 26, 2013

In early
March 2013 the Russian government launched an unprecedented,
nationwide campaign of inspections of thousands of
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to identify advocacy
groups the government deems “foreign agents” and force them to
register as such. The list below tracks the legal
consequences of the law on dozens of NGOs.

Since the
beginning of the “foreign agents” campaign, various
prosecutors’ offices and the Ministry of Justice filed
nine administrative cases against NGOs and an additional
five administrative cases against NGO leaders for failure to
register under the “foreign agents” law. Prosecutors
lost nine of these fourteen cases in courts. These were
cases filed against the Perm Regional Human Rights Center,
the GRANI Center for Civic Analysis and Independent
Research, the Perm Civic Chamber, the Side by Side LGBT Film
Festival and its director, Coming Out (an LGBT group) and
its director, and the Memorial Anti-Discrimination Center
and its director. The prosecutors won administrative cases
against the Kostroma Center for Support of Public
Initiatives and the center’s director.

The Ministry of
Justice filed administrative cases against the Golos
Association, an election monitoring group, and its director
and against Regional Golos, and won all three cases in
courts. Additionally, theprosecutors brought civil law suits
against four NGOs: Women of Don in Novocherkassk, the Center
for Social Policy and Gender Studies in Saratov, LGBT
organization "Coming out" and Memorial Anti-Discrimination
Center in Saint-Petersburg. Notably, the suits against the
Memorial Anti-Discrimination Center and LGBT organization
"Coming out" were nearly identical to the administrative
cases against groups that the prosecutors had lost. Two of
these organizations, Memorial Anti-Discrimination Center and Center for Social Policy and Gender
Studies lost the civil law suits in district courts and
are presently appeal those rulings.

The Ministry of
Justice ordered the two NGOs against which it had filed
administrative cases (both Golos groups) to suspend their
activities for several months. Also, at least three groups
(the Golos Association, the Kostroma Center for Support of
Public Initiatives, and the Side by Side LGBT Film Festival)
initiated proceedings on their own to wind up operations in
order to avoid further repressive legal action.

The
prosecutors also filed at least 12 administrative cases
against NGOs for refusing to provide documents during the
inspection campaign and lost two of them (against the
Rainbow Foundation in Moscow and the Foundation for
Development of Modern Civil Society Institutions in
Lipetsk).

At least 11 NGOs filed lawsuits against
prosecutors’ notices ordering the groups to register under
the “foreign agents” law, which they had received in the
wake of the inspection campaign. By late November, at least
three groups won their cases (Yekaterinburg’s Information
and Human Rights Center, Perm’s GRANI Center for Civic
Analysis and Independent Research, and the Perm Civil
Chamber).

Human Rights Watch is also aware of at least
three NGOs in different regions of Russia that succeeded in
getting the prosecutors’ warnings annulled in courts
(MASHR in Ingushetia, the Movement for Fair Elections in
Kurgan, and Golos in Siberia). At least two more warnings
(against Assistance to Cystic Fibrosis Patients in Moscow
region and the Phoenix Foundation in Vladivostok,
respectively) were revoked by the prosecutor’s offices
themselves.

Thirteen leading rights groups jointly filed a
complaint with the European Court of Human Rights
challenging the “foreign agents” law. The application is
currently under review. In August Russia’s ombudsman,
Vladimir Lukin, filed an appeal with the country’s
Constitutional Court on behalf of four organizations
challenging warnings from the prosecutor’s offices to
register and fines groups had incurred for failing to
register. Two other groups filed separate petitions with the
Constitutional Court challenging the “foreign agents”
measure’s compliance with the Russian
constitution.

I. Civil law suits – 4
NGOs

The Russian Civil Procedure Code gives
the prosecutor’s office powers to file a civil law suit
“in defense of rights, freedoms and legitimate interests
of citizens, general public or interests of the Russian
Federation, its subjects and municipal entities.”
Prosecutors began to use this provision against NGOs in
order to force them register as “foreign agents.” If the
prosecutors win those suits in court, relevant groups will
have to register as “foreign agent” organizations within
two weeks of the court ruling coming into
force.

Anti-DiscriminationCenter
“Memorial”(St.
Petersburg)

After the courts repeatedly quashed
the prosecutors’ administrative cases against ADC
“Memorial” and its director due to a number of
violations in case files (for details, see Section III), on
July 12 the prosecutor’s office filed a civil law suit
against the group claiming that its failure to register as a
“foreign agent” was unlawful and impaired the legitimate
interests of the general public. The arguments used in this
civil suit are similar to the ones used in the
administrative cases against the group, which had been
rejected by the courts. Court hearings on the civil suit
started on August 5, but were three times to date. On
November 25 the prosecutor petitioned the judge that the
group’s activities should be recognized as “foreign
agent’s activities”. Also the prosecutor presented new
expert evaluation concluding that ADC “Memorial” carried
out “political activities” according to the Russia
legislation on political parties. On December 12, the judge
supported the prosecutor's demand and ruled that the group
should register as a “foreign agent” NGO. The group has
one month to appeal the verdict. In case of losing the
appeal, the group will have to register within two weeks of
the ruling entering into force.

“Coming-out”
(Saint-Petersburg)

Though both district and
Saint-Petersburg city courts overturned the verdicts in
administrative cases to fine the group and its director on
August 14 and September 27 (for details, see Section III),
Saint-Petersburg Central district prosecutor filed civil law
suit case against the group on October 29. First court
hearings were scheduled on November 20 but have been
postponed twice to date. The hearings are presently
scheduled for December 25.

Women of Don
(Novocherkassk)

On September 3, after Women of
Don had refused to comply with the prosecutors’ orders to
register as a “foreign agent” organization (for details,
see Section IV), the prosecutor’s office filed a civil law
suit against the group. The suit argues that the group
engaged in “political activities,” inter alia, by
publishing on its website its annual reports on activities,
which the group submitted to the Ministry of Justice as
required by law. According to the prosecutors, the
information included in the report on roundtables and other
public events organized by the group to discuss the issue of
police reform “shapes public opinion and is aimed at
changing government policies.” Court hearings started on
October 31. Next hearings are scheduled for January 12.

Center for Social Policy and Gender Studies
(Saratov)

After the group disagreed with the
prosecutor’s notice of violations (for details, see
Section IV), on September 10 the prosecutor’s office filed
a civil law suit against the group. In addition to the
group’s activities, which were previously cited as
“political” in the notice of violations, the
prosecutor’s lawsuit also mentions a petition campaign
that several activists started to protect the group from the
“foreign agents” law and a public statement made in
support of the group by a number of Dutch NGOs. The latter,
according to the prosecutor, demonstrates that “the
organization’s foreign colleagues position it as an
organization participating in the country’s public and
political life, influencing the development of democratic
processes in the country, i.e. as political.” Court
hearings started on September 20 but were postponed three
times until November 27. On November 27, the judge supported
the prosecutor's demand and ruled that the group should
register as a “foreign agent” NGO. The group will appeal
the verdict to a higher instance court.

II.
Suspension of activities – 2 NGOs

If the
authorities consider that a group is performing the
functions of a “foreign agent’, but has not submitted
the documents to register itself as such, the Ministry of
Justice may order the activities to be suspended for a
period of up to six months. During this period the group may
not appear in mass media, organize public actions, or use
its bank accounts.

Association of NGOs in
Defence of Voters’ Rights “Golos”
(Moscow)

In April a court found the group and its
director guilty of violating the law on “foreign agents”
and fined both of them (for details, please, see Section
III). Following this, on June 25, the Ministry of Justice
ordered that the group’s activities be suspended for six
months. On July 15 the group lodged a judicial appeal
against the decision. On December 13, Gagarinskiy district
court in Moscow rejected group’s appeal. The group’s
activities remain suspended.

Regional Public
Association in Defense of Democratic Rights and Freedoms
“Golos” (Moscow)

In April a court found the
group guilty of violating the law on “foreign agents”
and fined it (for details, see Section III). Following this,
on September 30 the Ministry of Justice ordered that its
activities be suspended for three months.

III.
Administrative Court Cases - 9 NGOs

If a court
of law finds an organization responsible for failure to
register as a “foreign agent,” these groups may be fined
up to 500,000 rubles (over US$16,000) and their leaders
personally – up to 300,000 rubles (approximately
$10,000).

Association of NGOs in Defense of
Voters’ Rights “Golos” (Moscow)

According
to the protocol from the Ministry of Justice dated April 9,
the group drafted and promoted a unified Electoral Code and
allegedly received foreign funding in the form of the Andrey
Sakharov Freedom Award from the Norwegian Helsinki Committee
(NHC). Notably, Golos had sent the monetary prize in
question back to the NHC. The organization was fined 300,000
rubles (approximately $10,000) by the Presnenskiy court of
Moscow on April 25. The head of Golos was also personally
fined 100,000 rubles (approximately $3,300). Golos appealed
the court ruling on May 8. On June 14 the appeals court
upheld the ruling of the Presnenskiy
Court.

Kostroma Center for Support of Public
Initiatives (Kostroma)

According to the protocol
from the Kostroma regional prosecutor’s office dated April
15, the group conducted a roundtable on United States-Russia
relations attended by a US embassy representative. On May 29
a Kostroma court found the group in violation of the
“foreign agents” law and fined the group 300,000 rubles
(approximately $10,000). The group’s leader was also
personally fined 100,000 rubles (approximately $3,300). The
group appealed the ruling. Court hearings started on July 29
but were postponed until August 12. On August 12 the appeals
court upheld the ruling. Following this, on August 13 the
group filed a complaint with the Constitutional Court
challenging the law on “foreign agents” as violating
freedom of association guaranteed by the Russian
Constitution.

Anti-Discrimination Center
“Memorial” (St. Petersburg)

According to the
protocol from the Admiralteyskiy District prosecutor’s
office of St. Petersburg dated April 30, the group receives
foreign funding and published a report on police abuse of
Roma, migrants, and civil activists that was presented to
the United Nations Committee Against Torture. On May 27 the
court returned the case to the prosecutor’s office as
unsubstantiated. The prosecutor’s office sought to
overturn the court's ruling, but on June 27 and July 16
higher courts dismissed the prosecutor's appeal. On October
7 the Leninsky District Court again dismissed the prosecutor
office’s appeal against its director and the organization
itself. On December 5, Saint-Petersburg city deputy
prosecutor appealed the verdict. On December 16 the
prosecutor’s appeal was rejected by
court.

“Coming Out” (St.
Petersburg)

According to the protocol from the
Central District prosecutor’s office of St. Petersburg
dated April 30, this LGBT rights group receives funding from
the Consulate General of the Netherlands and the Embassy of
Norway and allegedly engaged in “political activities,”
in particular by holding a silent rally using the slogans,
“We are for traditional values: love, family, respect of
human dignity” (organized by independent activists), by
organizing a campaign against the adoption of the ban on
“homosexual propaganda” in St. Petersburg (notably, the
campaign was conducted before the “foreign agents” law
came into effect), and by publishing the brochure,
“Discrimination of LGBT Individuals: What, How and Why?”
Administrative court hearings started on May 27 and were
postponed twice until June 19. On June 19 a St. Petersburg
court ruled the group had violated the law and fined it
500,000 rubles (approximately $16,500). On June 25 the court
also fined the group's director 300,000 rubles
(approximately $10,000) for violating the law. The group
appealed the court ruling and on July 25 the appeals court
vacated the ruling and returned it to the court of first
instance for re-examination. On August 14 the appeals court
also vacated the ruling to fine the group’s director and
closed the case against her. On September 27 the St.
Petersburg City Court also vacated the ruling to fine the
organization itself and closed the case against it by formal
reason.

“Side by Side” LGBT Film Festival (St.
Petersburg)

According to the protocol from the
Central District prosecutor’s office of St. Petersburg
dated May 6, the group published a brochure titled, “The
International LGBT Movement: from Local Practices to Global
Politics” and participated in a public awareness-raising
campaign, “Let’s Stop the Homophobic Bill Together.”
Notably, the campaign was conducted in 2011, before the
“foreign agents” law entered into force. On June 6 a
local court in St. Petersburg ruled the group had violated
the law and fined it 500,000 rubles (approximately $16,500).
The group appealed the court ruling. On July 26 the appeals
court upheld it but reduced the size of the fine to 400,000
rubles (approximately $13,000). The ruling entered into
force on July 26. On October 4 the St. Petersburg City Court
vacated the ruling fining the organization itself and closed
the case against it because of the previous verdict’s
procedure violation.

On August 9 a court also fined Side
by Side’s director 300,000 rubles (approximately $10,000)
for violating the “foreign agents” law, but on November
11 the appeals court vacated this ruling.

Regional
Public Association in Defense of Democratic Rights and
Freedoms “Golos” (Moscow)

According to the
protocol from the Ministry of Justice dated May 13, in
December 2012 the group – a member of the “Golos”
Association – allegedly received foreign funding of more
than 4 million rubles (approximately $133,000) in total and
conducted work on the project, “Raising transparency of
the Russian electoral process by discussing and promoting a
unified Electoral Code.” On June 4 a Moscow court ruled
the group had violated the law and fined it 300,000 rubles
(approximately $10,000). The group appealed the ruling. On
September 17 a higher instance court rejected the group’s
appeal.

Center for Civic Analysis and Independent
Research / GRANI (Perm)

According to the protocol
from the Perm regional prosecutor’s office dated June 6,
the inspection of the group’s activities in April 2013
revealed violations of the law on “foreign agents.” The
group in 2013 received foreign funding of 751,000 rubles
(approximately $25,000) and allegedly engaged in
“political activities” by shaping public opinion on
state policies. In 2013 the group published the results of
the study, “Russian non-political activism” conducted in
2012 under a project funded by the C.S. Mott Foundation. In
December 2012 the group submitted to the regional
legislative assembly proposals for amendments to the draft
law on support of socially oriented NGOs in the Perm region,
and in January 2013 its leader took part in a roundtable
organized by the Perm Legislative Assembly, which discussed
this draft and recommended introducing a set of amendments
in line with recommendations by participants. On April 22
the prosecutor’s office issued a notice of violations to
the group (as noted in section II) instructing it to
register as a “foreign agent” NGO. On May 6 the group
replied to the notice challenging it and emphasizing that
the group’s staffers are members of several advisory
bodies for the state authorities, including the working
group of the federal government’s commission on
coordinating the “Open Government,” the regional
governor’s council on entrepreneurship, and the collegium
of the regional territorial development ministry. On May 16
the group’s governing bodies ruled not to implement the
prosecutor’s orders, as GRANI’s activities are aimed not
at changing state policy but at facilitating its
implementation as regards the rights and freedoms enshrined
in Russia’s constitution. Once informed of the group’s
decision, the prosecutor’s office concluded that the group
was in persistent violation of the law on “foreign
agents” and referred the case to court. Administrative
court hearings started on July 5 and were postponed until
July 17. On July 17 the court quashed the case. On July 25
the prosecutor’s office appealed to overturn the court
ruling, but on August 14 the appeals court upheld it. On
September 18 the Perm regional court dismissed the
prosecutor’s appeal.

Perm Civic Chamber
(Perm)

According to the protocol from the Perm
regional prosecutor’s office dated June 28, the April 2013
inspection of the group’s activities found violations of
the law on “foreign agents.” The group’s work is
mostly financed from foreign sources. For example, in 2011
it received a grant from a foreign donor for the project
“Perm United Service for Support of Non-Profit Groups and
Organizations.” The group is also a partner in the project
“Protection of the Right to Information in the Perm
Region” implemented by the Perm Regional Human Rights
Center and financed by the UN Democracy Fund. The
prosecutor’s office stated that an analysis of grant
agreements, reports on project implementation, and other
information on the group’s activity showed that foreign
organizations fund the group’s participation in political
activity in the Russian Federation. The prosecutor’s
office also said the center’s involvement in “political
activity” is also established by the fact that its members
shape public opinion on state policies by publishing
material that is available to a wide audience on the
Internet. The prosecutor's office cited as an example the
fact that in February 2013 a member of the Perm Civic
Chamber, Igor Averkiev, published news of his withdrawal
from the Political Council of the Perm region’s governor
on the Internet and it contained criticism of this body’s
activity. Previously, on April 25, the prosecutor’s office
issued a notice of violations to the group (as noted below
in Section II) instructing it to register as a “foreign
agent” NGO. After the group publicly declared that it will
not implement the prosecutor’s orders, the prosecutor’s
office concluded that the group was in persistent violation
of the law on “foreign agents” and referred the case to
court. At a hearing held on July 17 the court quashed the
case. On July 25 the prosecutor’s office appealed to
overturn the court ruling, but on September 5 the appeals
court upheld the ruling. On October 14 the Perm regional
court dismissed the prosecutor’s appeal.

Perm
Regional Human Rights Center (Perm)

According to
the protocol from the Perm regional prosecutor’s office
dated July 2, the inspection of the group’s activities in
April 2013 revealed violations of the law on “foreign
agents.” The group’s activity is mostly financed from
foreign sources: from 2010 to 2012 it received 5.6 million
rubles (approximately $175,000) from international and
foreign organizations for various projects. In January 2013
the group received a donation from the UN Democracy Fund for
the project “Protection of the Right to Information in the
Perm Region,” aimed at improving transparency of state and
municipal authorities. The prosecutor’s office stated that
an analysis of grant agreements, reports on projects
implementation, and other information on the group’s
activity shows that foreign organizations fund the group’s
participation in political activity in the Russian
Federation. The prosecutor’s office said the center’s
involvement in “political activity” is also established
by the fact that its members shape public opinion on state
policies by publishing material that is available to a wide
audience on the Internet. Examples of the latter cited by
the prosecutor’s office werePerm at a
Crossroads:The Little Man in the Stream of Reform,
a book published by the center in March 2013, and
articles, “Perm under the reformers’ bombardment” and
“Komi-Permyaks – look from the abyss.” Previously, on
April 25 the prosecutor’s office issued a notice of
violations to the group (as noted below in Section II)
instructing it to register as a “foreign agent” NGO. On
May 27 the center’s governing bodies ruled not to
implement the prosecutor’s orders, as the group’s
activities under the UN-funded project cannot be considered
political. Once informed of the group’s decision, the
prosecutor’s office concluded that the group was in
persistent violation of the law on “foreign agents” and
referred the case to court. On July 18 a court quashed the
case against the center. In late July the prosecutor’s
office appealed to overturn the court ruling, but on August
23 the appeals court upheld the ruling. On October 14 the
Perm regional court dismissed the prosecutor’s
appeal.

IV. Official Notices of Violations - 18
NGOs

The groups below received official orders
to “eliminate violations,” i.e. direct orders by the
prosecutor’s office to register as “foreign agents”
within one month of their respective dates of
notice.

Center for Civic Analysis and
Independent Research / GRANI (Perm)

A case was
referred to court for alleged persistent refusal by the
organization to comply with the “foreign agents” law
(for details, please see section III). The group challenged
the notice and lodged a judicial appeal on June 7. Court
hearings started on July 1 but were postponed until July 11.
On July 11 the court further postponed the hearings until
there has been a ruling in the administrative case against
the group. On November 11 the court quashed the
notice.

Baikal Environmental Wave
(Irkutsk)

According to a notice issued by the
prosecutor’s office dated April 23, the group's statue
provides for “active advocacy on environmental issues with
state and municipal authorities,” which constitutes
“political activity” within the meaning of the law. The
group filed a written objection to the notice with the
regional level prosecutor's office, but on July 18 the
prosecutor’s office upheld it. The group then lodged a
judicial appeal. Court hearings started on September 9 but
were postponed until October 16. On October 16 the Kirovsky
district court of Irkutsk dismissed the group’s
appeal.

Center for Social Policy and Gender
Studies (Saratov)

According to the notice dated
April 24, both the group’s statute provisions and its
current work relate to “political activities.” In April
2013 the group, which receives foreign funding, organized
the event, “Review of the social policy in the post-Soviet
area: ideologies, actors and cultures” and published the
book, Critical Analysis of Social Policy in the Countries
of Former Soviet Union, thereby aiming to influence
public opinion. On June 25 the group filed a motivated
written objection to the notice with the prosecutor's
office.

Information and Human Rights Center
(Yekaterinburg)

According to the notice dated
April 26, the group receives foreign funding and
participates in “political activities” through carrying
out projects aimed at “overcoming totalitarian stereotypes
by influencing public opinion with awareness-raising
activities, facilitating the establishment of the rule of
law by informing citizens about constitutional norms,
ensuring the priority of individual rights in state
practices and public life by remembrance of terror victims
in the past and defending the rights of citizens in the
present, as well as countering violent, unlawful,
totalitarian ways of ruling the state by organizing public
events (rallies, exhibitions, etc.).” Also, in September
2012, the group conducted a roundtable on the rights of
conscripts and military servicemen, addressing a set of
recommendations to the Ministry of Defense and the
government and therefore trying to influence governmental
policies in this area. The group challenged the
prosecutor’s notice of violations and lodged a judicial
appeal on September 30. On November 20, a local court
quashed the notice of violations.

Regional Public
Association in Defense of Democratic Rights and Freedoms
“Golos” (Moscow)

The prosecutor’s office
issued a “notice of violations” to the group on April
26. On May 27 the group appealed the notice to the courts.
The court hearings were scheduled for June 25 but were
postponed twice. On July 10 the court upheld the notice of
violations. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Justice opened an
administrative case against the group before the expiration
of a one-month period given by the prosecutor to
“eliminate the violations” listed in the notice (for
details, please see Section III). On December 6, Moscow city
court rejected the group’s appeal of the prosecutor’s
notice of violation.

Human Rights Center
“Memorial” (Moscow)

According to the notice
dated April 29, some of group’s objectives in its statute
relate to “political activity” and the group also
carries out programs and projects that monitor politically
motivated administrative detentions and criminal
prosecutions. The organization challenged the legality of
their inspection by the Moscow prosecutor’s office in
March 2013 and lodged a judicial appeal. On May 24 the
Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow rejected the
complaint by “Memorial” as ungrounded. The group
challenged the prosecutor’s notice of violations and
lodged a judicial appeal on May 28. Court hearings were
scheduled for June 28 but have been postponed three times
until November 18. On November 18 the court satisfied the
group’s motion to postpone the hearings until either the
Constitutional Court delivers its judgment on the compliance
of the law on “foreign agents” with Russia’s
Constitution or the joint NGO application to the European
Court of Human Rights is communicated to the Russian
authorities. Hearings are preliminarily scheduled to resume
on February 4, 2014.

“Women of Don”
(Novocherkassk)

According to the notice dated
April 29, after the law on “foreign agents” entered into
force, the group received foreign funding and “carried out
activities aimed at shaping public opinion and influencing
decision-making by the authorities through conducting events
with public participation, publishing propaganda information
materials online, as well as [doing so] in the course of
private meetings with imprisoned individuals.” Thus, the
group published on its website policy proposals on police
reform and conclusions on the ineffectiveness of current
state policy in this field. In April 2013 the group
organized an inter-regional seminar attended by the media,
the participants of which declared a detention of an NGO
leader in Krasnodar unlawful, opened for signing a petition
in his support, and addressed an appeal to the Russian
President, as well as “expressed negative attitudes
regarding the activities of state authorities and
highlighted the necessity to solve problems [independently]
without appealing to competent governmental agencies.”
Also, in April 2013 the prosecutor’s office received a
letter from an imprisoned individual who stated that while
meeting with him in her capacity as a Public Oversight
Commission member, the group’s leader “called him for
active actions in support of the group’s activities on
changing the legislation regulating the penitentiary
system.”

On July 20 the group’s governing bodies ruled
not to implement the prosecutor’s order to register as a
“foreign agent,” as it was not involved in any
“political activities.”

According to the notice dated April 29,
the group’s statute objectives include defending the
political rights of youth. The organization aspires to
influence public opinion with regard to governmental
policies and receives funding from the US-based National
Endowment for Democracy (NED) for a project aimed at
“developing democratic activism among Russian youth.”
The group also implements a project on human rights
education funded by the Germany-based “Remembrance,
Responsibility and Future” Foundation (EVZ) and published
a collection of articles expressing political views of the
project’s participants. According to the prosecutor’s
office, both donor institutions “define their objective as
influencing political processes worldwide.” Moreover, in
2012 the group conducted activities aimed at monitoring
rights violations in the military and providing direct
assistance to conscripts and military servicemen who
suffered abuse. The authorities also flag that the very fact
that the organization is well known for promoting the
alternative civil service proves that its work relates to
“political activities.” The group challenged the
prosecutor’s notice of violations and lodged a judicial
appeal. Court hearings started on August 6 but were
postponed twice until November 27.

Interregional
Human Rights Association “AGORA”
(Kazan)

According to the notice dated April 30,
the group implements a project on Internet freedom funded by
Internews, supporting “activities of lawyers capable of
influencing policy and law enforcement practice” and
aiming at “adoption of regulations on administrative
procedures for implementing the law on Internet by the
government and the State Agency for Supervision of
Communications [Roskomnadzor].” The notice also flags that
the group is accredited by the Ministry of Justice as an
independent expert entity authorized to conduct
anticorruption evaluation of legal acts and their
drafts.

“Panorama” Center
(Moscow)

According to the notice dated May 6, the
group implements a foreign-funded research project on
political processes, which involves holding roundtables and
discussions and publishing information regarding the
drawbacks of current legislation and the evolvement of
public protests in Russia. On June 6 the group’s governing
bodies ruled not to implement the prosecutor’s order to
register as a “foreign agent,” as it was not involved in
any “political activities,” and filed a written
objection to the notice with the prosecutor’s
office.

“Lawyers for Constitutional Rights and
Freedoms” / JURIX (Moscow)

According to the
notice dated May 7, the group's statute provides for
carrying out various activities “in the field of law and
public policy.” The group receives foreign funding and its
staff members participated in the advocacy campaign against
the adoption of a ban on “homosexual propaganda” in St.
Petersburg, including by providing legal expertise on the
draft law and taking part in the public hearings at the
Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg as well as televised
debates on the issue. The group filed a written objection to
the notice with the prosecutor’s office, who rejected the
appeal on August 7. The group then lodged a judicial appeal
to challenge the notice. Court hearings started on November
18, but the court satisfied the group’s motion to postpone
the hearings until either the Constitutional Court delivers
its judgment on the compliance of the law on “foreign
agents” with Russia’s Constitution or the joint NGO
application to the European Court on Human Rights is
communicated to the Russian authorities. Hearings are
preliminarily scheduled to resume on February 4,
2014.

“Public Verdict” Foundation
(Moscow)

According to the notice dated May 8, the
group carries out political activities, which are mostly
financed from foreign sources. In the view of the
prosecutor’s office, the group’s activity “is aimed at
interfering with governmental policy in the field of law
enforcement by proposing legislative amendments, shaping
public opinion on the necessity of changing law enforcement
policy currently exercised by the authorities, and gaining
public support for its actions aimed at exhorting greater
influence on the authorities.” The prosecutors consider
the following actions as examples of the group’s
“political activities”: “involving society in
discussing the reform of the Ministry of Internal Affairs,
monitoring citizens’ rights observance while conducting
public events, providing legal assistance to the individuals
accused under the ‘Bolotnaya case,’ preparing and
coordinating the work on drafting the Alternative NGO Report
to the UN Committee against Torture [on Russia’s
compliance with the UN Convention against Torture],”
offering “recommendations to participants of public
protests regarding [appropriate] behavior at the rallies,”
and “organizing and supporting campaigns of petitions to
state authorities.” The group challenged the
prosecutor’s notice of violations and lodged a judicial
appeal on June 13. Court hearings were scheduled for June
28, but have been postponed three times until November 18.
On November 18 the court satisfied the group’s motion to
postpone the hearings until either the Constitutional Court
delivers its judgment on the compliance of the law on
“foreign agents” with Russia’s Constitution or the
joint NGO application to the European Court on Human Rights
is communicated to the Russian authorities. Hearings are
preliminarily scheduled to resume on February 4,
2014.

Independent Council of Legal Expertise /
NEPS (Moscow)

According to the notice dated May
6, the group’s work is related to “political
activities” and it should register as a “foreign
agent” NGO.

Moscow School of Political Studies
(Moscow)

According to a notice dated May 8, the
group’s work is related to “political activities” and
must register as a “foreign agent”
NGO.

Yaroslavl Regional Hunters’ and Fishermen
Society (Yaroslavl)

According to the notice dated
April 16, some of the provisions in the group’s statute
relate to “political activity” and it should register as
a “foreign agent” NGO.

Perm Civic Chamber
(Perm)

A case was referred to court for alleged
persistent refusal by the organization to comply with the
“foreign agents” law (for details, please see Section
III). The group challenged the notice of violations and
lodged a judicial appeal on June 7. On July 16 the court
chose to postpone the hearings on the challenge until the
ruling on the administrative case against the group is
delivered. On November 6 the court quashed the notice of
violations.

Perm Regional Human Rights Center
(Perm)

Case referred to court for alleged
persistent refusal by the organization to comply with the
“foreign agents” law (for details, please see Section
III). The group challenged the notice of violations and
lodged a judicial appeal on June 7. On July 18 the court
chose to postpone the hearings on the challenge until the
ruling on the administrative case against the group is
delivered. The court hearings are scheduled to resume on
November 21.

Foundation for Social and Legal
Assistance “Sphere” (Saint Petersburg)

The
Sphere Foundation supports the activities of Russia’s LGBT
Network, a leading Russian group of activists fighting
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. On June 6
there were court hearings on the challenge by the Sphere
Foundation to the legality of the prosecutor’s office
inspection of the NGO in the spring of this year. During the
hearings representatives of the prosecutor’s office
claimed that on April 20 they issued a notice of violations
to the group requiring it to register as a “foreign
agent.” The Sphere Foundation refuted these claims and
stated that they neither received any such notice, nor were
they aware of it. Their complaint regarding the inspection
was rejected by the court.

V. Warnings Not to
Violate the Law - 53 NGOs

The groups below
were warned of a need to register as “foreign agents” if
they plan to carry out “political activities” or receive
foreign funding in the future.

Kostroma
Soldiers’ Mothers Committee
(Kostroma)

According to the warning dated April
16, the group’s representatives were involved in election
observing in December 2011 and March
2012.

Democratic Center
(Voronezh)

According to the warning dated April
16, the group was involved in election observing in December
2011. The group challenged the warning and lodged a judicial
appeal, but on July 19 the local court upheld the warning.
The group appealed the ruling. On December 3, Voronezh
regional court upheld the ruling. The district court’s
ruling thus entered into force.

Volgograd Center
for NGO Support (Volgograd)

According to the
warning dated April 22, the group implements a public
diplomacy project titled, “Information Center on
International Security” funded by the NATO information
bureau, which is aimed, inter alia, at providing
“information support to activities of regional branches of
political parties, representatives of the authorities, civil
society institutions on topical issues of international
relations and international
security.”

Interregional Committee against
Torture (Nizhniy Novgorod)

According to the
warning dated April 22, the group took part in “public
events, which may be regarded as political activity”
before November 2012.

“Man and Law”
(Yoshkar-Ola)

According to the warning dated
April 24, the group’s statute stipulates that its staff
“may take part in public events, meetings and rallies,”
and that the organization can work to “facilitate
accountability for state officials that perpetrate blatant
violations of human rights and freedoms in the Russian
Federation.”

Institute of Press Development –
Siberia (Novosibirsk)

According to the warning
dated April 24, one of the objectives in the group’s
statute is “assistance to civil society development in
Russia and strengthening democratic principles in the life
of Russian society” and several types of public activities
that the group may carry out to achieve this objective
relate to “political activity.” The group challenged the
warning and lodged a judicial appeal, but on June 10 a local
court upheld the warning. The group appealed the ruling, but
on September 12 lost the appeal. Following this decision,
the group filed a complaint with the Constitutional Court
challenging the law on “foreign agents” as violating
freedom of association guaranteed by Russia’s
Constitution.

“Assistance to Cystic Fibrosis
Patients” (Istra, Moscow Region)

According to
the warning dated April 24, one of the objectives in the
group’s statute is “defending the rights and legal
interests of cystic fibrosis patients in the state’s
authority,” and the group “may come up with initiatives
on various issues of public importance, submit proposals to
state authorities, and defend rights and legal interests of
its members as well as other citizens in the face of federal
and municipal authorities.” The prosecutor’s office
revoked the warning on April 30.

Amur
Social-Ecologic Union (Blagoveshchensk)

According
to the warning dated April 24, one of the objectives in the
group’s statute is “assistance to the state authorities,
citizens and their associations in the activities aimed at
preserving and restoring natural and cultural heritage and
sanitation of the environment,” and several types of
public activities that the group may carry out to achieve
this objective relate to “political activity.” The group
sent a list of objections to the prosecutor’s office on
May 6 to challenge the warning. However, on May 27 the
prosecutor’s office upheld the warning.

Amur
Environmental Club “Ulukitkan”
(Blagoveshchensk)

According to the warning dated
April 24, the group’s statute includes a provision on
“the right to participate in decision making by state
authorities,” and in 2011 the organization carried out a
foreign-funded contest for journalists to commemorate the
25th anniversary of the Chernobyl accident. The group
challenged the warning and lodged a judicial appeal, but on
June 4 the local court upheld the warning. The group
appealed the ruling, but on August 12 the appeals court
upheld it. Following this decision, the Federal Ombudsman
filed a complaint with the Constitutional Court in the
interests of the group challenging the law on “foreign
agents” as violating freedom of association guaranteed by
the Russian constitution.

“Phoenix” Foundation
(Vladivostok)

According to the warning dated
April 24, the group’s statute provides for its possible
participation in “political activity.” The group
challenged the warning on April 29, and the prosecutor’s
office revoked it on June 4.

Ryazan “Memorial”
Society (Ryazan)

According to the warning dated
April 24, some of the objectives in the group’s statute
and types of activities relate to “political activity.”
The group challenged the warning and lodged a judicial
appeal, but on October 16 a district court upheld the
warning. On December 25, Ryazan regional court overturned
the district court’s ruling and the prosecutor’s warning
was quashed.

Movement “For Fair Elections”
(Kurgan)

According to the warning dated April 24,
the group received foreign funding before the “foreign
agents” law came into effect and may carry out
“political activities.” The group challenged the warning
and lodged a judicial appeal. On May 27 a local court
quashed the warning. The prosecutor’s office appealed the
court ruling, but on August 28 the appeals court upheld
it.

“Golos – Siberia” Foundation
(Novosibirsk)

According to the warning dated
April 24, some of the group’s statute provisions relate to
“political activity,” and in 2012 it received funding
from the Foundation for Support of Democracy “Golos,”
which is a recognized recipient of foreign funding. In July
the group appealed the warning to a court of law. On October
29 a local court quashed the warning.

“Golos –
Urals” Foundation (Chelyabinsk)

According to
the warning dated April 25, some of the objectives in the
group’s statute relate to “political
activity.”

“Golos – Volga region”
Foundation (Samara)

According to the warning
dated April 26, which the group’s director only received
on July 2, some of the objectives listed in the group’s
statute relate to “political activity.” Also, in 2012
the group received funding from the Foundation for Support
of Democracy “Golos,” which the authorities recognize as
a recipient of foreign funding. The group challenged the
warning and lodged a judicial appeal. Court hearings started
on August 12 but were postponed until August 29. On August
29 the court dismissed the group’s appeal and upheld the
warning. The group appealed the ruling, but on October 29 a
higher instance court upheld it. Following this decision, on
November 13 the group filed a complaint with the
Constitutional Court challenging the law on “foreign
agents” as violating freedom of association guaranteed by
the Russian constitution.

“Citizens’ Watch”
(St. Petersburg)

According to the warning dated
April 26, some of the provisions in the group’s statute
relate to “political activity.” Besides, the group
“conducts public events, including seminars, and publishes
materials in the mass media.”

Center for NGO
Development (St. Petersburg)

According to the
warning dated April 26, the group receives foreign funding
and some of the provisions in its statue relate to
“political activity.” The warning also stated that the
group conducts “public events, including workshops,
roundtables, and trainings, and publishes materials in mass
media.”

Urals Democratic Foundation
(Chelyabinsk)

According to the warning dated
April 25, the group receives foreign funding and may carry
out “political activities.”

Urals Human Rights
Group (Chelyabinsk)

According to the warning
dated April 25, the group receives foreign funding and may
carry out “political activities.”

Center
“Transparency International – R”
(Moscow)

According to the warning dated April 26,
both the group’s statute objectives and its actual
activities prove that it participates in shaping public
opinion on state policies related to law enforcement and in
other fields and influences the decision making of Russian
state authorities, including the legislative process. The
group challenged the warning and lodged a judicial appeal on
June 5. Court hearings were scheduled for July 31 but were
postponed until August 9. On August 9 the court dismissed
the group’s appeal and upheld the warning. The group
appealed the ruling. On December 10, Moscow city court
upheld the ruling. The court’s ruling entered into
force.

Center for Independent Sociological
Research (St. Petersburg)

According to a warning
dated April 26, the group, in connection with the group’s
statutory goals, “conducts sociological research,
organizes events in the field of social science, and
publishes academic literature.” As the organization also
receives foreign funding and its work may involve
“political activities,” the Tsentralny District
Prosecutor’s Office of St. Petersburg warned the group’s
leadership of possible liability for noncompliance with the
“foreign agents” law.

Center for Independent
Social Research and Education (Irkutsk)

According
to a warning dated April 26, the group receives foreign
funding and some of its statutory provisions relate to
“political activity.”

Komi Human Rights
Commission “Memorial” (Syktyvkar)

According
to the warning dated April 27, some of the group’s statute
provisions relate to “political activity.” Besides,
“the group’s members in 2011-2012 participated in public
and political actions, including protest actions, aimed at
influencing the decision-making by state
authorities.”

Kirov Regional Hunters’ and
Fishermen Society (Kirov)

According to the
warning dated April 29, some of the group’s statute
provisions relate to “political
activity.”

Muraviovka Park of Sustainable Land
Use (Amur Region)

According to the warning dated
April 30, some of the provisions in the group’s statute
that defends and studies birds relate to “political
activity” and it received funding from the International
Crane Foundation. The group challenged the warning and
lodged a judicial appeal. Court proceedings started on July
19 but were postponed until July 29. On July 29 the court
upheld the warning. The group appealed the ruling, but on
October 4 the appeals court upheld it.

“Nature
and Youth” (Murmansk)

According to the warning
dated April 30, the group’s statute provides for
“participation in creating legislative framework at the
regional level,” which relates to “political
activity.”

Center for Democracy Development and
Human Rights (Moscow)

According to the warning
dated May 8, some of the provisions in the group’s statute
and its projects relate to “political activity” as
regards both interaction with the authorities and shaping
public opinion.

Journalism Advancement and Support
Center (Moscow)

According to the warning dated
May 8, the group received foreign funding in 2012 and has a
regularly updated its Facebook page with links to
publications in varied media outlets, including analytic and
other materials on state policies and activities of state
agencies. The prosecutor’s office flags that these
publications are aimed at shaping public opinion about
governmental policies and therefore, the group’s work may
relate to “political activities.”

Levada
Center (Moscow)

According to the warning dated
May 15, the group receives foreign funding in the form of
grant and service contracts and issues two periodic
publications, which are disseminated free of charge in print
version and brought to public attention online. These
publications contain articles on “the country’s most
important political processes” and in addition to quoting
the results of opinion polls, also contain individual views
of the authors on political issues. Moreover, the group
regularly issues press statements on major political issues,
organizes jointly with the International Memorial Society a
series of public seminars on social and political issues
related to democratization and overcoming totalitarian past,
and conducts research on elections (including elections to
the State Duma in December 2011).

Foundation for
Assistance to Public Opinion Research
(Moscow)

According to the warning dated mid-May,
the group, which is a subsidiary organization to Russia’s
most prominent polling agency, the All-Russian Center for
Public Opinion Research (VTsIOM), received foreign funding
and published research findings relevant to political
processes in the country.

Regional Public
Foundation “INDEM” (Moscow)

In May a
prominent independent think-tank INDEM, which carries out
research on a wide range of social, political, and economic
issues, publishes research-based reports and briefing
papers, and holds conferences and other public events
received a warning from the prosecutor’s office that their
work may constitute political
activity.

“International Standard” Foundation
(Ufa)

According to the warning dated May 6, from
2010 to 2012 the group received funding from the European
Commission and the US embassy for the projects titled,
“Improving security culture of human rights NGOs” and,
“Democracy lessons for local communities:
Awareness-raising and practical skills for local housing
committees.” The organization conducted a series of
workshops, published relevant print materials, and made a
film on security for civic activists. In the view of the
prosecutor’s office, the group therefore participates in
shaping public opinion on state policies. At the same time,
one of the group’s founders promoted one of the candidates
in the 2012 local elections.

Center for Social and
Educational Initiatives (Izhevsk)

According to
the warning dated May 6, the group received foreign funding
in 2010-2011 and, according to its statute, has the right to
engage with state and municipal policy makers and to hold
public rallies. These provisions, in the opinion of the
prosecutors’ office, “enable” the group “to carry
out political activities.”

Center for
Interethnic Cooperation (Moscow)

According to the
warning issued in May, the group receives foreign funding
and conducts conferences and seminars for officials and law
enforcement officers on harmonizing interethnic relations,
which may influence decisions made by the authorities. The
prosecutor’s office instructed the group to register as a
“foreign agent” in case it continues these
activities

Regional Press Institute (St.
Petersburg)

Following an inspection and an
interrogation at the prosecutor’s office in early April,
the group, whose work focuses on capacity building for local
media, received a vaguely worded warning dated April 26. The
prosecutors indicated that the group held “public events,
including workshops, and published literature in mass
media” and urged the organization to register as a
“foreign agent” in case they continue to receive foreign
funding and engage in political activities.

MASHR
(Ingushetia)

According to a warning dated April
24, some of the group’s statute provisions relate to
“political activity.” The group appealed the warning to
a court, which quashed the warning on July 9. The
prosecutor’s office appealed the court ruling, but on
September 26 a higher instance court upheld
it.

Saami’s Public Association of the Murmansk
Region / OOSMO

According to the warning dated
April 24, the group receives foreign funding and some of the
provisions in its statute relate to “political
activity”.

One more Saami group in Murmansk region was
warned by the prosecutors’ office on the same
grounds.

Phoenix PLUS (Orel)

According
to a warning dated May 30, the group, which carries out
activities in the field of HIV/AIDS prevention, received
foreign funding and its statute provides for
“participation, in accordance with the Russian
legislation, in elections and referendums,” which is
considered “political activity.”

Environmental
Watch of the North Caucasus (Maykop)

According to
a warning dated April 29, which the group’s director
received only on July 20, the group’s statute “in fact
declares its participation in political activity.” As
evidence of this, the prosecutor’s office cited some of
the group’s statutory goals: directly influencing
government policies at all levels, including countering
corruption among executive authorities, courts,
environmental and law enforcement bodies, facilitating the
improvement of legislation, and taking measures to preserve
the existing standards in the sphere of environmental
protection, as well as defense of citizens’ rights and
freedoms. In addition, the prosecutor’s office said, the
group could stage rallies, demonstrations, and other public
events against environmental degradation and the cruel
treatment of animals. The warning also noted that
Environmental Watch of the North Caucasus received grants
from foreign foundations and is therefore required to
register as a “foreign agent.”

Foundation for
Freedom of Information (St. Petersburg)

A warning
dated July 11 states that the group carries out “political
activities” by seeking to shape public opinion. The group
advocates for access to information on the work of state
authorities in order to influence decision-making by
government officials. The group publishes information on
various Internet sources, and it launched a website which
serves as a platform for submitting proposals to the
National Action Plan on issues related to the openness of
state governance. The group monitors access to information
on the official websites of state authorities, publishes its
findings and recommendations, and proposes relevant
amendments to Russia’s legislation. The group’s staff
members actively participate in Russian and international
events on freedom of information. The group engages in
strategic litigation on important cases relevant to access
of official information. The group has also accepted foreign
funding, including after the law on “foreign agents”
came into effect.

Maximum
(Murmansk)

According to the warning dated July
18, the group, which provides social, psychological, and
legal assistance to the LGBT community, received foreign
funding in 2012 and its director organized public actions to
raise awareness of discrimination on the grounds of gender,
race, religion, and ethnicity. As an example of such actions
the prosecutor’s office cited a rally held in May 2013,
which aimed at “expressing and shaping opinions on the
issues of hatred and homophobia in the
society.”

Similar warnings were also issued to 11
environmental groups listed below:

Egyptian jets bombed Islamic State targets in Libya on Monday, a day after the group there released a video showing the beheading of 21 Egyptian Christians, drawing Cairo directly into the conflict across its border. More>>

Ambassadors representing two countries under attack from ISIL, Bashar Ja’afari (right) of Syria, and Mohamed Ali Alhakim of Iraq, speak to journalists following the adoption of a Security Council resolution targeting sources of financing for ... More>>

Abdullah Abu Rahma, coordinator of the popular committee in the village of Bil’in where Kayla joined the protests, told ISM: “Kayla came to Palestine to stand in solidarity with us. She marched with us and faced the military that occupies our ... More>>

3 February 2015 – Parents in the United States must vaccinate their children against measles in order to maintain the high levels of immunity necessary in keeping outbreaks of the aggressively contagious virus small and contained, the United Nations World ... More>>

3 February 2015 – For the second time in as many days, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the United Nations Security Council have jointly condemned the brutal killing of a civilian by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) – this time deploring ... More>>